Sri K S Prabhuswamy Vs the Managing Director

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DTD.28.3.2019 ISSUED BY THE R-2 VIDE ANNX-QA TO THE W.P.DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO INCLUDE THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER IN THE FINAL SERNIORITY LIST OF ASSISTANT ARTISAN PUBLISHED VIDE NOTIFICATION DTD.27.11.2017 AT ANNX-K IN THE APPROPRIATE PLACE AND THEREAFTER CONSIDER THE CASE OF THE PETITIONER FOR RETROSPECTIVE PROMOTION

¶19

2 -

¶20

NC: 2026:KHC:8425 WP No. 24688 of 2019

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

TO THE NEXT HIGHER CADRE AND EXTEND ALL OTHER CONSEQUENTIAL MONITORY BENEFITS AS REQUESTED BY THE PETITIONER VIDE WRITTEN REPRESENTATION DTD.06.03.2018 AT ANNX-L TO THE W.P.

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

This petition is filed assailing the endorsement dated

¶27

28.03.2019 marked at Annexure-Q and seeking a writ of

¶28

mandamus to direct the respondents to include the petitioner's name in the final seniority list of Assistant Artisan.

¶29

In the said endorsement at Annexure-Q dated

¶30

28.03.2019, the respondent/Corporation has stated that the petitioner's seniority is mentioned in the category of Turners.

¶31

The petitioner has assailed the said

¶32

endorsement on the premise that his seniority is fixed on the basis that petitioner requested for transfer from one division to another division. Said transfer which is made

¶33

3 -

¶34

NC: 2026:KHC:8425 WP No. 24688 of 2019

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

in the year 2006 is pursuant to an alleged request for transfer dated 23.07.1999.

¶37

The petitioner has urged that it was not a request transfer, but it was a transfer initiated by the respondent without there being any request by the petitioner.

¶38

The petitioner has also filed an application on 16.05.2016 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 ('RTI Act') to furnish the copy of the said alleged request dated 23.07.1999.

¶39

To the said application, the

¶40

respondent/Corporation has replied stating that the said document is not available.

¶41

It is to be noticed that the application under the provisions of the RTI Act is filed on 16.05.2016 and the petitioner sought a copy of the application dated 23.07.1999. The Court is of the view that the application is filed belatedly. Corporation cannot be expected to

¶42

4 -

¶43

NC: 2026:KHC:8425 WP No. 24688 of 2019

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

maintain the record of the application seeking transfer filed 17 years earlier.

¶46

It is also relevant to notice that in terms of the order at Annexure-C dated 23.07.1999, the respondent/Corporation has specifically mentioned that the petitioner is transferred pursuant to the request. In the said notice/order it is made clear that the transfer is made pursuant to petitioner's request. If the petitioner had not made a request for transfer, the remark in the order to the effect that the transfer is effected pursuant to the petitioner's request should have been questioned by the petitioner within a reasonable time. The petitioner has not chosen to do so.

¶47

The petitioner filed an application under the RTI Act on 16.06.2016 seeking information on the relieving order dated 23.07.1999. The Court is of the view that such a belated prayer by the petitioner to furnish a copy of the application and inability on the part of the Corporation to furnish the said copy by itself is not a reason to believe

¶48

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:8425 WP No. 24688 of 2019

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

that no such request for transfer was made in 1999. In case the petitioner had not made any such request, the Court would assume that he would have questioned that order which indicates that the transfer is made pursuant to his request. Since no such challenge is made within a reasonable period, the Court would presume that petitioner made a request for transfer.

¶51

Under these circumstances, the prayer 'A'

¶52

seeking to quash the endorsement at Annexure-Q cannot be considered.

¶53

However, it is also required to be noticed that the petitioner has sought writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to include the petitioner's name in the final seniority list of Assistant Artisan.

¶54

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in terms of Annexure-K, the seniority list, the petitioner's name is not found.

¶55

6 -

¶56

NC: 2026:KHC:8425 WP No. 24688 of 2019

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

Learned counsel for the respondents on

¶59

instructions would submit that on 10.10.2023 one more seniority list was published and his seniority is at serial No.1 in the category of Auto Machinist.

¶60

Learned counsel for the respondent/Corporation has furnished two seniority lists. One is dated 23.03.2024 and the another is 30.06.2025 and in both the lists, the petitioner is at serial No.1 in the category of Auto Machinist.

¶61

In addition to that, one more order dated 10.10.2023 is furnished and said order is relating to the promotion list of persons in various categories and petitioner's name is found in serial No.13 and he is now promoted as Auto Machinist.

¶62